Search Results

You've heard the mantra, especially from newspaper editorials around Arizona, accusing the Legislature of "disgraceful, seemingly willful abandonment of our public schools." (See Payson Schools facing Tough Competition.) Arizona's news editors don't want you to know the "rest of the story," if it doesn't fit their Leftist world view. What are the facts?

by Ms. Julie Smith, a member of the Gilbert Public Schools Governing Board elected in November of 2012. Artwork by Miss Natalie Smith, an eighth grade student at Gilbert Classical Academy, a Gilbert Public School.

Gilbert Public Schools (GPS) finished their zero based budgeting process some time ago and were given several budget options from which to choose. They could have gone for steeper cuts in the budget immediately (option C), but chose less cuts this year and are now discussing asking the voters for an override to avoid the additional cuts that will come up next year. A 10% override has been mentioned, but there are no specific proposals yet.

Almost every school district has one or more property tax overrides in place. It’s the new normal. Capital improvement overrides provide additional money for a specific purpose, like a major upgrade of a school district’s computer system. Maintenance and Operation (M&O) overrides provide schools with additional money for everyday expenses. Theoretically they are used to get past a financial rough patch, but there aren’t any examples of that happening. Instead, the school spends the money like it will be there forever, and as the time approaches for the override to expire, they begin the process of asking the voters for another override to keep the money coming. That’s what is being talked about at GPS.

What Happened to the Technology Override Money?

Another issue with overrides is that the additional money doesn’t always get used the way it was sold to voters. In 2007 GPS voters passed a $57.4 million dollar capital override for computers and internet access. That’s a lot of technology, $1400 per student, but where are the results? There are a few technology bright spots within GPS, but overall the capability is fair to poor.

Please keep an eye on this issue! The federal government along with radical environmentalists are willing to destroy a multiple-generation operation and steal this rancher's cattle over an "endangered" ................desert tortoise.

The very same scenario is unfolding in Arizona, compliments of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and radical environmentalsts who want to declare the Mexican wolf as endangered and release wolves across 15 Arizona counties. The gross economic output of the agricultural industry in the area is estimated to be $4.2 billion annually.

Send an email to both Clark County Sheriff Douglas Gillespie (Sheriff@lvmpd.com) and Governor Brian Sandoval and tell them to stand up against the BLM and order the federal government out of Clark County and out of Nevada. To contact Gov Sandoval, click HERE

Remember this televised debate between Peter Schiff and Art Laffer on August 28, 2006? Schiff correctly predicted the Great Recession, and he was soundly ridiculed by Laffer and the moderator on Kudlow & Company. Pay attention to everything that Peter Schiff said. It all came true in December 2007, for exactly the reasons that Schiff stated.

Some projects are just not appropriate next to a residential neighborhood, no matter how much money Gilbert thinks it's going to make. This is one of them.

Isn't it the local government's responsibility to protect the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens? Should local government introduce a project with known high noise and traffic levels next to the homes of Gilbert residents who seek a retreat from noise and traffic?

Even if you don't live in the affected neighborhood, do you care about your neighbor's quality of life? Or just your own? As Mike Webb puts it, are you a PIITBY? (Put it in Their Back Yard)

What about the cost of this public/private partnership? If things don't go quite right, who gets left holding the debt? BMX or Gilbert citizens?

The Town of Gilbert will be holding a second BMX Open House on Tuesday, April 8 from 6:00 - 8:00 PM, at 50 E. Civic Center Drive, Gilbert. It seems that, after the first open house, some residents started asking some "vetting questions" that hadn't been asked by the Town of Gilbert or the Town Council. Were they too mezmerized by the dog and pony show put on by BMX?

In case you haven’t heard Gilbert has been planning a public/private deal with USA BMXto build an Olympic size bike track right in the middle of south Gilbert. The track, BMX offices, and museum will be built just South of Germann Road, on the West side of Greenfield in the now empty former farm land that was part of the infamous Zinke Dairy land purchase from a few short years ago. The BMX facility would be northeast of the soccer fields already in this area. The facility being discussed will have seating for four thousand people with an expected attendance of up to eight thousand people several times a year when regional and national events are held. This deal with BMX will also include a public freestyle bike park and twenty acres of gravel overflow parking in addition to parking at the BMX track itself.

As far as I can tell, I was the first Gilbert citizen (that is not associated with any special interest groups) to find out any details regarding the facility. This was on March 7, when I met town employees Dan Henderson and M. Scott Powell from the Office of Economic Development, along with John David, COO of USA BMX. It was also at this meeting that I learned that the first open public meeting was scheduled just four days later on March 11and that the project was scheduled to be voted on by the Town Council on March 27, just 20 days after I found out about the project. However, after expressing my concern over the timing and only having twenty days' notice before the vote to approve the project, the Town moved the vote date to April 17.* That's still not much time for review by the general public.

I was invited by both USA BMX and the Town of Gilbert to attend a race event at the Black Mountain BMX trackin north Phoenix on March 15. So to be diplomatic about this situation and to possibly ease my concerns, I agreed to attend. I packed up my two nine-year olds and carpooled with Mayor Lewis and his son to the event. I believe full disclosure is always important, so I will tell you that we had VIP passes and sat in the VIP tent where they provided lunch consisting of a burrito and soda.

If you listen to the Super Bowl Hype-a-Thon, big business interests, and the media, you would believe that everybody in Arizona will receive a huge economic boost from hosting the Super Bowl in 2015. If Governor Brewer hadn't vetoed SB1062, the Super Bowl wouldn't come to Arizona!!! (The articles on this disaster are easy to google.)

Pearl-clutching gasp!

Well, what about that "economic boost"? I for one have some questions. For example, how much has it cost the taxpayers to build the Stadium that meets the requirements of the NFL? How much will it cost the taxpayers to refurbish it? How much will the taxpayers pay for additional police and fire protection? Street maintenance? Advertising?

Did you know that SRP wasted $1 million of their customers' money on a Super Bowl advertising campaign that did nothing to improve energy efficiency or serve its ratepayers? Also, SRP isn't in competition with other utilities and doesn't even need to self-promote at the Super Bowl. Stated Diane Brown, executive director of the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), "When SRP promotes the Super Bowl, the arts or human services, no matter how valiant the program, the correlation to the purpose of providing electricy and water fails to exist and ratepayers are left with a tab they didn't order."

What about all those economic benefits?

"A look at six Super Bowls dating to 1979 -- three in Miami, two in Tampa, one in Phoenix -- found no increase in sales revenue over previous years without the big game, said Philip Porter, author of the study.

"One reason may be that the estimated 140,000 fans who attend Super Bowl events in tourist-oriented Florida, Arizona or California displace the usual visitors from colder regions, he said.

"'There ought to be a spike that sticks up like a sore thumb," said Porter, an economics professor at the University of South Florida at Tampa. "It doesn't exist. There is no blip. You don't find anything.'"

"We are being suckered," Porter said. "People who want us to do something for them are selling us snake oil."

On one side, you have the NFL. Last week, the league, as part of its non-stop hype-a-thon for the First Super Bowl Outdoors In Cold Weather Isn't Snow Just Romantic?, reported that the New York/New Jersey economy would see a $600 million boost as a result of Super Bowl spending. "Thanks to the Super Bowl, we're seeing more hotel rooms booked and restaurant tables reserved and even more excitement than usual for this time of year," U.S. Rep Carolyn Maloney told reporters.

On the other, you have the nation's sports economists, who say the actual number is a fair bit lower. Like, maybe, zero. "There still remains no ex post evidence of an economic impact," says University of South Florida professor Philip Porter, almost audibly sighing over email since, as someone who's been studying this topic for more than a decade, he gets the same question every year at this time. "Super Bowl attendees simply don't buy much that the local economy sells."

One of the researchers quoted in the above article was Victor Matheson. The abstract from his indepth study titled Economics of the Super Bowl states: